Re:Stable Diffusion Frivolous Litigation
by sebzim4500 on Sunday January 15, 2023 @02:36PM
(#34392442)
Fine then. Say I went through Star Wars and counted how many blue pixels there were in each frame and published a list of the counts. Would you claim that list would be infringing?
Doing statistical analysis does not violate copyright, or Google would have to shut down tomorrow.
Re:Stable Diffusion Frivolous Litigation
by notahacker on Sunday January 15, 2023 @04:02PM
(#34393358)
> Fine then. Say I went through Star Wars and counted how many blue pixels there were in each frame and published a list of the counts. Would you claim that list would be infringing?
If you were instructed to counted blue pixels by somebody who used your lists for a SaaS product which could generate high fidelity representations of Death Stars, wookies and Harrison Ford (someone else probably counted the other colour pixels!) every time a customer of theirs typed in "Star Wars", quite possibly.
Re:Stable Diffusion Frivolous Litigation
by johnthewise on Sunday January 15, 2023 @03:22PM
(#34392921)
The algorithm itself tries to learn to remove noise. This part of algorithm is undeniably a learning process, evidenced by the fact that it gets better along the training process. It just happens to be that, in order to remove noise, you need to have an understanding of the underlying thing(probability distribution), so in order to learn to remove noise, it needs to learn the images. I don't understand how a mathematical function by definition can't learn, since it's just a language we use to describe what's going on.
Ah, but you are anthropomorphizing an algorithm. What is happening inside the computer you call learning, but it is just some mathematical function. Other people might not agree that this is learning, and might call it "mixing" or "copying".